putz boy....
so this is your big achievement of this thread...
you must be very proud of this singular triumph.....
putz boy wrote...."At least you are willing to concede that Nelson Mandela was there singing a song about killing white men"
putz boy....I have to be content with small victories...
so this is your big achievement of this thread...
you must be very proud of this singular triumph.....
putz boy wrote...."At least you are willing to concede that Nelson Mandela was there singing a song about killing white men" Originally Posted by stevepar
[putz boy...So why bother anyway?
"fucking faggot".... what a clever retort....I guess when you're really stupid your ability to degrade yourself becomes easier....
if you weren't such a putz and so easily manipulated I'd probably pay you no mind....
QUOTE=Jewish Lawyer;1055227432]I already done retired, boy...or should I say fucking faggot? Originally Posted by stevepar
Your lame-ass reasoning verifies your perverted desire to be the subject photographed in the lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM's deviant pictures, Old-Twerp.
So what do the numbers tell us:
--Two percent of any large group may be wackos
--Reichsfuehrer IIFFY and the IBFuehrer were there to support their ideological pal
--The 1 alderman who voted against impeachment, wonder what their views might be Originally Posted by Old-T
I wouldn't go that far, IB. Old-T isn't so bad. Originally Posted by Jewish LawyerOld-Twerp ignorantly insists that if one doesn't openly object to something; then one must fully support it. By Old-Twerp's own lame-ass reasoning, Old-Twerp must fully condone every one of the lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM's vile and disgusting pictures, since Old-Twerp never condemns the lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM's vile and disgusting pictures.
A PLEA FOR THE ART OF THE MOTION PICTURE: We do not fear censorship, for we have no wish to offend with improprieties or obscenities, but we do demand, as a right, the liberty to show the dark side of wrong, that we may illuminate the bright side of virtue – the same liberty that is conceded to the art of the written word – that art to which we owe the Bible and the works of Shakespeareand
If in this work we have conveyed to the mind the ravages of war to the end that war may be held in abhorrence, this effort will not have been in vain.Various film historians have expressed a range of views about these titles. To Nicholas Andrew Miller, this shows that "Griffith's greatest achievement in The Birth of a Nation was that he brought the cinema's capacity for spectacle... under the rein of an outdated by comfortably literary form of historical narrative. Griffith's models... are not the pioneers of film spectacle... but the giants of literary narrative."[45] On the other hand, S. Kittrell Rushing complains about Griffith's "didactic" title-cards,[46] while Stanley Corkin complains that Griffith "masks his idea of fact in the rhetoric of high art and free expression" and creates film which "erodes the very ideal" of "liberty" which he asserts....